User talk:Mikwehttam

Thank You!

@Thewolfchild: Thank you for the warm welcome! I'm just getting my feet wet right now, mostly adding citations where needed and editing grammar every now and then haha. Any advice is appreciated though! Mikwehttam (talk) 10:07, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Welcome

Hello, Mikwehttam, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! - theWOLFchild 09:47, 5 July 2018 (UTC) Getting started Introduction Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia Finding your way around Table of contents Directories and indexes Department directory Editing articles How to develop an article Simplified Manual of Style Getting help Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Our new user help forum, the Teahouse The Help Desk, for more advanced questions Help pages Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles How you can help Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Left-right political spectrum

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Left-right political spectrum; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:54, 4 June 2020 (UTC) ————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Thank you for your feedback regarding my edit. However, my original contribution was in line with the consensus on the article’s talk page. If you review the most recent section in the talk page, you’ll find that at the time of my edits there was a unanimous agreement that the intro sentence was too specific, and that the mention of “social equality” and “social hierarchy” did not belong there. Regardless of whether there is a consensus or not, this is not a justified reason to revert an edit. There is no bias toward the status quo. If you disagree that there is a consensus, then the place to settle that is in the article's talk page, not by repeatedly reverting another editors contributions. You appeared to have reverted my edits (twice now) unnecessarily and in bad faith, so I reverted your first edit, and then attempted to discuss the dispute on the article’s talk page. This is not engaging in an edit war as currently defined on Wikipedia (see Edit war).

To clarify:

1. An edit war occurs when editors who disagree about the content of a page repeatedly override each other's contributions. (Edit war)
2. When disagreement becomes apparent, one, both, or all participants should cease warring and discuss the issue on the associated talk page. (Edit war)
3. Revert an edit made in good faith only after careful consideration. It is usually preferable to make an edit that retains at least some elements of a prior edit than to revert the prior edit. Furthermore, your bias should be toward keeping the entire edit. (Revert only when necessary)
4. Do not revert an edit because that edit is unnecessary, i.e. the edit does not improve the article. For a reversion to be appropriate, the reverted edit must actually make the article worse. Wikipedia does not have a bias toward the status quo (except in cases of fully developed disputes, while they are being resolved). In fact, Wikipedia has a bias toward change, as a means of maximizing quality by maximizing participation. (Bad reasons to revert)

My override of your revert is what established a dispute, which is why I recommended discussing further edits in the article's talk page first, in order to avoid an edit war. I have also intentionally refrained from overriding your edits a second time for that very reason. I should advise that as you have now repeatedly overridden my contribution without attempting to resolve the dispute first, this may be viewed as an attempt to engage in an edit war, as defined above and in the linked article. To avoid an edit war from starting, I will continue to refrain from overriding your revert again, until a resolution is agreed upon. I will respond to your comments in the article's talk page as soon as I get a chance, and we can discuss the merits of my edit there. If you still believe your revert of my edit was justified afterwards, we can continue the discussion in the article's talk page, or use one of the other methods of dispute resolution, which you have already mentioned. Mikwehttam (talk) 05:42, 4 June 2020 (UTC)